1 2025:CGHC:60673 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 732 of 2023 1 - Ku. Manorama Tokal D/o Adanna Tokal, Aged About 28 Years Caste Scheduled Tribe, Presently Working As Anm At Sub Health Center, Bhurri Of Chc Of Bhairamgarh, District Bijapur R/o Bajarpara Kutru, District Bijapur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Ku. Renu Yalam D/o Kanhaiya Yalam, Aged About 28 Years Caste Scheduled Tribe, Presently Working As Anm At Sub Health Center, Marudbaka Of Chc Of Usoor, District Bijapur R/o Sub Health Center, Awapalli, District Bijapur (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Ku. Neelam Gawde D/o Baldau, Aged About 28 Years Caste Scheduled Tribe, Presently Working As Anm At Sub Health Center, Parkely Of Chc Of Bhairamgarh, District Bijapur R/o Bajarpara, Ghanora, District Bijapur (Chhattisgarh) 4 - Ku. Payal Tati D/o Gutta, Aged About 27 Years Caste Scheduled Tribe, Presently Working As Anm At Sub Health Center, Kaushalnar Of Chc Of Bhairamgarh, District Bijapur R/o Kotiya Para, Gangaloor, District Bijapur (Chhattisgarh) 5 - Ku. Aruna Bodki (Before Marriage Name Was Aruna Punem) Aged About 32 Years Caste Scheduled Tribe, Presently Working As Anm At Community Health Center, Usoor, District Bijapur R/o Village Avapalli, District Bijapur (Chhattisgarh) 6 - Ku. Umadevi Osaka (Name After Marriage Uma Devi Borla) D/o Baburao Osaka Aged About 33 Years Caste Obc, Presently Working As Anm At Sub Health Center, Tarrem Of Chc Of Usoor, District Bijapur R/o Wrd Colony, Bijapur, District Bijapur (Chhattisgarh) --- Petitioners YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2026.01.08 18:30:32 +0530 2 Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director, Directorate, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Collector, District Bijapur (Chhattisgarh) 4 - Chief Medical And Health Officer, District Bijapur (Chhattisgarh) --- Respondents WPS No. 1216 of 2023 Sohan Sodi S/o Bheema Sodi Aged About 22 Years Working As Watchman/chaukidar At Community Health Centre Nelasnar, Bijapur R/o Thanapara, Aawapali, Bhopalpattanam, District - Bijapur, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Directorate, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector District - Bijapur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Chief Medical And Health Officer District - Bijapur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondents WPS No. 1008 of 2023 Santosh Kumar Majji S/o Masa Ram Aged About 22 Years Working As Ward Boy At District Hospital Bijapur R/o Tadmed, Post Kutru, Tah Bhairamgarh, District Bijapur Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner Versus 3 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector District Bijapur Chhattisgarh 4 - Chief Medical And Health Officer District Bijapur Chhattisgarh --- Respondents WPS No. 3160 of 2023 Mangli D/o Kahru Aged About 22 Years Caste Muriya, Occupation Mess Servant, R/o Village And Post Koshalnar, Police Station Barsoor, Tahsil Bhairamgarh, District : Bijapur, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Director Of Health Services And Family Welfare Department Atal Nagar, New Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Collector District Bijapur (Chhattisgarh) 4 - The Chief Medical And Health Officer District Bijapur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents WPS No. 3188 of 2023 Mahesh Madvi S/o Shri Kunna Madvi Aged About 22 Years Caste Dorla, Occupation Ward Boy, R/o Village And Post Mudanda, P.S. Avapalli, Tahsil Usoor, District Bijapur (C.G.) ---Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Director Of Health Service And Family Welfare Department, Atal Nagar, New Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Collector District Bijapur (C.G.) 4 4 - The Chief Medical And Health Officer Distt. Bijapur (C.G.) --- Respondents WPS No. 3169 of 2023 Krishnakant S/o Shri Durgaiya, Aged About 29 Years Caste Mahar, Occupation Washerman, R/o Village And Post Toynar, Tahsil Bijapur, District : Bijapur, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Heath And Family Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Director Of Health Services And Family Welfare Department, Atal Nagar, New Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Collector, District Bijapur Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Chief Medical And Health Officer, District Bijapur Bijapur Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents WPS No. 1366 of 2023 Dhananjay Pambhoi S/o Shri Ajay Pambhoi Aged About 30 Years R/o Ward No. 8, Bhopalpatnam, Tahsil And Police Station Bhopalpatnam, District Bijapur (C.G.) ---Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Directorate Of Health Services, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector Bijapur, District Bijapur (C.G.) 4 - Chief Medical And Health Officer Bijapur, District Raipur (C.G.) 5 - Block Medical Officer Bhairamgarh District Bijapur (C.G.) 5 6 - Medical Officer Community Health Centre, Nelasnar, Block - Bhairamgarh, District Bijapur (C.G.) --- Respondents WPS No. 1212 of 2023 Rajoo Ram Mudma S/o Bheema Chinna Ram Aged About 24 Years Working As Washerman/dhobi At Community Heath Centre Nelasnar, Bijapur R/o Talab Para, Chintanpalli, District Bijapur (C.G.) ---Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Directorate, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Atal Nagar, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector District Bijapur (C.G.) 4 - Chief Medical And Health Officer District Bijapur (C.G.) --- Respondents WPS No. 1004 of 2023 1 - Made Kamlesh S/o Bodka Ram Made Aged About 26 Years Caste Scheduled Tribe, Presently Working As Pharmacist Grade-2 At Primary Health Center, Pamed Of C.H.C. Of Usoor, District Bijapur R/o Gram Panchayat Vadla, P.O. Bareguda, Bhopalpattanam, District Bijapur Chhattisgarh Bijapur Chhattisgarh 2 - Kirti Mandavi S/o K.K. Mandavi Aged About 26 Years Caste Scheduled Tribe, Presently Working As Pharmacist Grade 2, At Primary Health Center, Koshalnar Of Chc Of Nalesnar, District Bijapur R/o Ganesh Ji Ward, Bhairamgarh, District Bijapur Chhattisgarh ---Petitioners Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 6 2 - Director Directorate, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector District Bijapur Chhattisgarh 4 - Chief Medical And Health Officer District Bijapur Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Respective Petitioners : Mr. Ashok Kumar Shukla, Ms. Chetna Sharma, on behalf of Mr. Rajnish Singh Baghel, and Mr. Kishore Narayan, Advocates. For Respondents/State : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Govt. Advocate Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 12.12.2025 1. Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Shukla, Ms. Chetna Sharma, on behalf of Mr. Rajnish Singh Baghel and Mr. Kishore Narayan, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State. 2. By way of these nine writ petitions, the petitioners are seeking indulgence of this Court in respect of their termination pursuant to the impugned orders dated 16.01.2023 (Annexure P/1), 20.01.2023 (Annexure P/10) as also the inquiry report (Annexure P/11). By the said orders, on the basis of an inquiry, the concerned Collector directed removal of the petitioners from 7 service on the ground that their appointments were not in accordance with law. 3. Consequently, vide order dated 20.01.2023, the concerned Chief Medical and Health Officer (hereinafter referred to as “CMHO”) terminated/cancelled the appointments of the petitioners to the posts of Rural Health Coordinator (Female), Pharmacist Grade-II, Ward Boy, Washer Man, Watch Man, Lab Assistant, Mess Servant, Washer Man and Ward Boy, respectively. 4. A perusal of the impugned order dated 20.01.2023 reveals that the appointments of the petitioners were found to be in excess of the vacancies advertised vide advertisement dated 20.10.2021. It has been recorded that, out of the total vacancies so advertised, most of the petitioners were appointed beyond the sanctioned and advertised posts. Upon receipt of complaints, an inquiry was conducted, and it was found that the petitioners were surplus appointees vis-à-vis the advertised posts, and in certain cases, despite their rejection for the concerned posts, they were subsequently appointed. 5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders of termination, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present writ petitions. 6. For the sake of convenience, Writ Petition (Service) No. 732 of 2023 is taken as the lead case, wherein the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:— 8 “1. Hon'ble Court may be kind and gracious enough to call for the records of the case from the respondents. 2. Hon'ble Court may be kindly be pleased to quash the Order No. 35/ कले / स्थापना /2023 dated 16.01.2023 (Annexure P/1) issued by respondent no.3 by issuance of appropriate writ/writs, order/orders. 3. Any other relief/relief's which Hon'ble court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. 4. Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the order dated 20.01.2023 (Annexure P/10) issued by respondent no.4 by issuance of appropriate writ/writs, order/orders. 5. Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to declare the inquiry report (Annexure P/11) bad in law hence having no force by issuance of appropriate writ/writs, order/orders.” 7. Brief facts of the cases, for disposal of these writ petitions, are that, respondent No.1 is a Department of the State of Chhattisgarh dealing with matters relating to the Health Department. Respondent No.2 is an officer of the Government of Chhattisgarh. Respondent No.3 is the District Collector, and Respondent No.4 is the appointing authority of the petitioners. The petitioners were initially appointed on contractual basis to the posts of Rural Health Convener (Female)/Auxiliary Nurse and Midwife (ANM) by orders dated 17.10.2014, 26.10.2017, and 9 14.12.2018 under the establishment of Respondent No.4 and have rendered more than five years of continuous service in the Health Department. 8. Subsequently, regular posts of ANM and other Class-III and Class-IV posts were sanctioned by respondent No.2 for various districts. Pursuant thereto, the office of respondent No.4/CMHO, Bijapur issued an advertisement dated 20.10.2021 for recruitment to various posts, including 10 posts of ANM (Female). Out of the said posts, 8 were reserved for Scheduled Tribe candidates, 1 for OBC category, and 1 for Persons with Disabilities. The selection process was to be conducted through a written examination by the Special Junior Employee Selection Board, Bastar. 9. In response to the said advertisement, 120 candidates applied for the post of ANM (Female). After scrutiny, 72 candidates, including the petitioners, were found eligible and were permitted to appear in the written examination, which was conducted on 26.12.2021. The result of the written examination was declared on 10.01.2022, followed by document verification of candidates figuring in the top 30 positions of the merit list between 02.02.2022 and 08.02.2022. Thereafter, a provisional list of eligible and ineligible candidates was published on 18.02.2022 inviting objections, and a revised list was again published on 11.03.2022 inviting further objections. 10 10. After consideration of objections, the final select list was issued on 26.04.2022 by respondent No.4. The names of petitioners were appeared in the waiting list under the Scheduled Tribe category and OBC category. Thereafter, by orders dated 15.11.2022, all the petitioners were appointed to the post of ANM (Female) on probation for a period of three years, during which they were entitled to stipend only. The appointment orders specifically recorded that the select list would remain valid for one year and that the petitioners were appointed on the basis of their position in the waiting list. The petitioners were posted in remote and interior areas of District Bijapur and joined their respective places of posting. 11. It is thereafter that the impugned orders dated 16.01.2023 and 20.01.2023 came to be passed, pursuant to an inquiry, whereby the appointments of the petitioners were cancelled/terminated on the ground that their appointments were allegedly made in excess of the advertised vacancies, giving rise to the present writ petitions. 12. Learned counsel for the respective petitioners submitted that the impugned orders by which the services of the petitioners have been terminated and their appointments cancelled have been passed in complete disregard of the principles of natural justice. It is contended that neither any show-cause notice was issued to the petitioners nor were they afforded any opportunity of hearing 11 before passing the orders of termination, despite the fact that the orders entail serious civil consequences. It is further submitted that the termination orders are stigmatic in nature, branding the petitioners as “excess employees”. Such stigmatic orders, passed without following due process, are liable to be quashed on this ground alone. The petitioners are not alleged to have made any misrepresentation or played any fraud at the time of appointment. Even assuming the allegation of excess vacancies to be correct, the entire recruitment process was conducted by the respondent authorities, and the petitioners had no role whatsoever in determining the number of vacancies or in issuance of the advertisement. 13. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioners merely participated in a duly notified recruitment process, were found eligible, were placed in the select/waiting list in accordance with merit, and were thereafter issued appointment orders after completion of the entire selection procedure. No fault, mischief, misrepresentation, or suppression of facts is attributable to the petitioners so as to justify penal action against them. It is further contended that the petitioners have rendered service for a considerable period and, pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court dated 23.01.2023, they are continuing in service. The petitioners are low-paid employees, working in remote and tribal areas of District Bijapur, a predominantly tribal region of Bastar Division, providing essential healthcare services to rural and 12 economically weaker sections of the population. They have discharged their duties with utmost sincerity, care, and caution, and there is nothing adverse against them either with regard to their conduct or qualifications. They submitted that the petitioners cannot be made to suffer for alleged irregularities committed by the respondent authorities. The services of the petitioners are still required by the Health Department, and during the course of service they have gained valuable experience in the public healthcare system of the State of Chhattisgarh. All the petitioners possess the requisite qualifications for the posts in question and continue to be eligible. 14. Placing reliance upon the settled legal position, learned counsel for the respective petitioners submitted that where appointments are not tainted by fraud or misrepresentation on the part of the candidates, irregularities, if any, attributable to the employer can be rectified without visiting the employees with the extreme penalty of termination. In support of the aforesaid contention, reliance has been placed upon the recent judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sanjay Kumar Mishra and others v. District Judge, Ambedkar Nagar (U.P.), reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2267, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court, while noticing that the termination was not per se illegal, nevertheless held that in view of long years of service rendered by the employees, the ends of justice would be met by accommodating them against available vacancies. 13 15. Learned counsel for the respective petitioners further submitted that a proposal was sent to the concerned Secretary seeking enhancement of vacancies and that, in anticipation of such enhancement, appointments were issued. It is contended that the said action cannot be faulted so as to penalise the petitioners, who acted bona fide on the basis of appointment orders issued by the competent authority. It is, therefore, urged that a sympathetic and equitable consideration is warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case, as the petitioners are being removed from service without any fault on their part. For the irregularities, if any, committed by the authorities, the petitioners ought not to be made scapegoats. Accordingly, it is prayed that the writ petitions be allowed and the impugned orders be set aside. 16. On the other hand, learned State counsel vehemently opposes the contentions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners. It is submitted that the petitioners were appointed in excess of the vacancies advertised under the recruitment notification dated 20.10.2021. Such appointments, being contrary to the terms of the advertisement and in excess of sanctioned posts, are inherently irregular and constitute a fundamental illegality. Consequently, all such appointments are void ab initio and cannot confer any legal right upon the appointees. It is further submitted that neither the length of service rendered by the petitioners nor any sympathetic consideration can cure the irregularity or 14 illegality in the appointments. The petitioners, therefore, have no vested or enforceable right to continue in service. Their continuation cannot be justified merely on the ground that they had performed duties in remote tribal areas or that they participated in the recruitment process in good faith. Accordingly, the impugned orders terminating the services of the petitioners have been rightly passed and do not call for interference. 17. Learned State counsel further submits that, in order to ensure accountability and to rectify the irregularity, an inquiry was conducted into the recruitment process to identify the officials responsible for making excess appointments. Pursuant thereto, all persons involved, including the concerned CMHO who issued the appointment orders and other employees implicated in the recruitment process, were directed to face departmental proceedings. The departmental inquiry has since been completed and the punishment orders in respect of the officials found responsible are awaited. It is further submitted that certain candidates, after joining service pursuant to the recruitment notification, subsequently resigned. Such vacancies, arising after resignation, were required to be treated as fresh vacancies and were mandatorily required to be re-advertised. However, the CMHO, Bijapur filled up even such vacancies from the waiting list, which is clearly impermissible in law. The said action is in direct violation of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme 15 Court in Sudesh Kumar Goyel v. State of Haryana, (2023) 10 SCC 54, particularly paragraph 19 thereof. 18. It is contended by the State counsel that complaints having been received regarding the recruitment process, a four-member committee was constituted by the Collector, Bijapur. After due inquiry and affording opportunity of hearing, the committee found the CMHO, Dr. Sunil Bharti, and the Head Clerk, Chain Singh Thakur, responsible for gross negligence in the recruitment process and recommended initiation of disciplinary action against them. Consequently, the delinquent officers were placed under suspension. The CMHO, being a Class-II officer, has been subjected to a departmental inquiry, and before passing the order of punishment, the matter has been referred to the Public Service Commission for approval. Admittedly, the appointments were made in excess of the posts advertised. Appointments made without sanction of law and dehors the recruitment advertisement are void ab initio. In such a situation, affording a separate opportunity of hearing to the petitioners would have been a mere empty and useless formality, as no prejudice could have been demonstrated by them. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has consistently held that principles of natural justice need not be applied where the outcome is inevitable, as laid down in Canara Bank v. V.K. Awasthy, (2005) 6 SCC 321; Aligarh Muslim University v. Mansoor Ali Khan, (2000) 7 SCC 529; and Ashok Kumar Sonkar v. Union of India, (2007) 4 SCC 54. 16 19. It is further submitted that no misconduct, stigma, or role has been attributed to the petitioners individually. The illegality in the recruitment process has been squarely attributed to the CMHO and the Head Clerk of the office of CMHO, Bijapur. The petitioners, being merely beneficiaries of an illegal process, could not have offered any explanation with regard to such illegality. Therefore, the termination of their services, being a consequence of void appointments, is lawful and justified, and does not warrant interference by this Court. 20. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned State counsel at length and perused the pleadings, documents placed on record, and the impugned orders. I have also considered the rival submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and the judgments relied upon by them. 21. From a perusal of the advertisement annexed as Annexure P/3, it is evident that a total of 10 posts of Rural Health Coordinator (Female), 1 post of Lab Assistant, 10 posts of Pharmacist Grade- II, 4 posts of Ward Aya, 5 posts of Ward Boy, 2 posts of Chowkidar, 2 posts of Washerman and 1 post of Mess Servant, along with other posts, were advertised. The advertisement categorically stipulated that the number of posts advertised was subject to variation as per administrative requirement. It further provided that the waiting list would remain valid for a period of one year from the date of declaration of the final result, and that 17 any dispute arising out of the recruitment process would be adjudicated by the competent authority. 22. A bare perusal of the advertisement thus clearly demonstrates that the number of posts was not rigid or immutable, but expressly variable depending upon requirement. The petitioners participated in the recruitment process, were duly selected on merit, and were issued appointment orders strictly in accordance with law. There is nothing on record to suggest that the petitioners, in any manner, either violated the terms of recruitment or indulged in any misrepresentation or illegality in securing their appointments. It is also evident that the petitioners had no knowledge whatsoever that their appointments were allegedly made in excess of the initially advertised posts. 23. On the contrary, upon perusal of the show cause inquiry documents annexed along with the return filed by the State, it transpires that the Chief Medical and Health Officer (CMHO), Bijapur, addressed official communications bearing Letter No. 1187/Mu.Chi.A./Establishment/2022 dated 19.07.2022 and another Letter No. 1376/Mu.Chi.A./Establishment/2022 dated 08.08.2022, seeking sanction of additional posts. These communications clearly indicate that the demand for extra posts was raised with a view to strengthening medical infrastructure and providing better healthcare facilities in the core Naxalite and Tribal areas. 18 24. It is pertinent to note that the appointments of the petitioners were made through a lawful process; their service books were opened, salaries were disbursed, and they were allowed to discharge their respective duties. All these circumstances cumulatively establish that no illegality or procedural irregularity is attributable to the petitioners. The final select list annexed as Annexure P/5 evidences that the petitioners were selected on the basis of merit; the list clearly delineates both selected candidates as well as those placed in the waiting list. Thus, no infirmity in the selection process itself can be discerned. 25. The only issue raised pertains to alleged excess appointments, which, as reflected from the official correspondence dated 19.07.2022 and 08.08.2022, were made in anticipation of sanction of additional posts, thereby ensuring continuity of essential public healthcare services. 26. Further, from the inquiry report, it has been categorically recorded by the concerned CMHO that the petitioners are experienced personnel, most of whom have been rendering services on contractual basis since 2014 and 2018 respectively, particularly in Tribal and Naxalite-affected areas. The report further records that their services are indispensable for the improvement and sustenance of public health services in these difficult and remote regions. 19 27. In Sanjay Kumar Mishra (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court considered an identical issue, wherein appointments made in excess of the advertised posts were subsequently terminated. The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that where the advertisement itself contemplates an increase or decrease in vacancies, such provision manifests the intention of the appointing authority to operate a waiting list for filling vacancies arising in excess of those notified, which is permissible under the governing rules. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, while setting aside the termination orders, directed the authorities to consider adjustment of the concerned appointees against available vacancies, and in the absence thereof, to create supernumerary posts. Relevant observations contained in paragraphs 10 and 11 of the said judgment, which are reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference :- “10. As we noticed, the advertisement specifically indicated that there could be an increase or decrease of vacancies, which as on the date of advertisement was also indicated as twelve posts. The said recital in the advertisement would clearly indicate that the Appointing Authority intended that a wait list be maintained so as to fill up the vacancies arising in excess of those notified, which was permissible as per the rules. As has been pointed out from the counter affidavit after the advertisement of 2000, the next advertisement was only in 2008 and then in 2015. Definitely 20 vacancies arose within the said period, and this is the reason why the appellants were appointed on various dates subsequent to the appointment to the twelve vacancies advertised. We are definite that the very same situation arose in Naseem Ahmed v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2011) 2 SCC 734, and the learned Single Judge as also the Division Bench erred in not accepting the said contention, especially having ignored the clear recital of the notification that the vacancies could be increased or decreased from twelve, as notified. 11. We cannot but find the termination to be unjustified. However, the fact remains that the appellants have been out of employment for almost 17 years. We also see from the select list that the date of birth of 2nd and 4th appellants indicate the said appellants having passed the age of 60, while the others have little more time to superannuate, if the age of superannuation is 60. In the above circumstances especially when the appellants have not taken any efforts to pinpoint the substantive vacancies to which they were appointed and the appointment itself having been made temporarily, we issue the following directions; reckoning the fact that all the appellants have worked for eight years: i) The appellants if not having completed the age of superannuation shall be accommodated in the existing vacancies of 21 Class IV in the District Judgeship of Ambedkar Nagar. If there are no vacancies existing, they shall be appointed in a supernumerary post, which shall be adjusted against the future vacancies or shall seize on their retirement, whichever occurs earlier. ii) If any of the appellants have crossed the age of superannuation, they shall be entitled to minimum pension dehors the fact that they have completed only 8 years in employment and not entitled to an appointment as of now. iii) Those appellants who are appointed shall be continued without any seniority but reckoning the period already spent in service also for determining pensionable service and in any event shall be granted pension at the minimum. iv) The appellants shall not be entitled to treat the intervening period of 17 years in which they have not worked, for any purpose, neither as notional service nor even for computing pensionable service. v) The above directions shall apply only to the four appellants herein.” 28. Reverting to the facts of the present case in the light of above judicial precedent, it is evident that the advertisement contained an explicit recital regarding variation in the number of posts. The concerned CMHO addressed official communications seeking sanction of additional posts, and the inquiry report unequivocally 22 states that the appointments were made in anticipation of such sanction, keeping in view the urgent need for medical services in Tribal and Naxalite-affected areas. The petitioners duly applied, participated in the recruitment process in accordance with law, and are experienced Grade-III and Grade-IV employees and working since long time as well as pursuant to an order of status quo passed by this Court, are continuing in service till date. 29. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, this Court finds that the impugned orders dated 16.01.2023 (Annexure P/1), 20.01.2023 (Annexure P/10) as also the inquiry report (Annexure P/11) are unsustainable in law and are accordingly quashed. The respondent authorities are directed to consider the case of each of the petitioners and adjust them against available vacancies. In the event no sanctioned vacancies are available, the petitioners shall be accommodated against supernumerary posts, in accordance with law. 30. With the aforesaid observations and directions, WPS Nos. 732/2023, 1004/2023, 1008/2023, 1212/2023, 1216/2023, 1366/2023, 3160/2023, 3169/2023 and 3188/2023 stand allowed. 31. There shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh